Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Classic CD players???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Classic CD players??? - Page 3

post #31 of 65
Markl,

I am not arguing, just trying to balance the opinions ;o). I guess I was replying to your first post. But, indeed, you put lots of water in your wine (French saying, I am afraid it does not translate so well) in your second post...

Also, I am not sure I follow the age limit. When do we start to call a CDP old classic?

My only point here, and it is redondant with what others said: the chassis, tyres, suspensions are just as critical as the engine...

Arnaud.
post #32 of 65
The very first time I heard a CDP was back in 1982 or 83. I was in college and a local hi-fi store had a demonstration of the "new" CD format. The player was a Denon but I don't remember the model. I do remember that the disc loaded in the front, vertically, and that when it played you could see it spinning around through a glass door in the face. Very cool looking indeed. I bought a CDP a few years later, a Harmon Kardon I believe, and for the next two decades have had several players of better and better quality. My first truly good hi-fi setup consisted of a Denon TT, Hafler 500 amp, Dahlquist DQM-9 speakers. No CDP I've ever had duplicated the wonderful sound. Now after 20 years of CD, I'm happily back to vinyl.

That Denon player though, gets my vote into the CDP "classics" hall of fame.
post #33 of 65
I guess I mainly agree with Mark here, the main difference between CDPs is the advancements in the "total" DAC design. Not just the higher upsampling rates 24/192 but even more important is the better filter designs that this allows. The best sounding players are the ones with best filter designs.

Can't really compare a stock new $400 CDP to a 5 yr old $3,000 CDP beause of the overall quality of parts used in cheap player is so compromised, even though cheap DAC may sound better if you could insert into old player. Even so I suspect many of the best stock cheap players come "close" to matching sound from best 5yr old CDPs (owners of these players vehemently deny this, he he)

This is why Modwright and other places are busy, they take cheap CDP and upgrade the quality of some key cheap mass produced parts to compete with high end gear

Another option for good 5yr old CDP if you can't afford $3,000 new CDP is get new quality outboard 24/192 DAC like Bel Canto DAC 2 etc.
post #34 of 65
Newer=better: I love the formula!

NGF
post #35 of 65
tanfenton,
If you don't believe me that digital has come a LONG way in the last several years, perhaps you'll believe Bob Ludwig. He also jumps on "newer and better" digital technology and has been throughout his career, leading the industry in the use of 24/96 and now 24/192-based equipment in the mastering of the albums he works on, as he discusses at length here: http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...bobludwig.html

Here's a few quotes from Bob:
Quote:
So, to get back to the assumption that re-masterings always sound better, when they do, the quality of Analog to Digital converters has improved in the past 7 years or so thus, all things being equal, projects can be re-done with better fidelity now. Also, the availability of digital gear that runs at higher sampling rates and wider bit depths keep the rest of the post production stream more audiophile.
Quote:
In the digital domain, the gear is finally starting to catch-up to the promise high resolution digital brought to us. It has been ten years since I bought one of the first 96kHz/24 bit converters from dCS in the UK. There was a while when I had serial #1 of some of their gear. I once had a 192kHz converter where the only thing I could do with it was play it back through another 192kHz converter! There was no means of easily storing it for a while.
Quote:
Analog tape has always sounded wonderful. Vinyl disk is a medium our ear really loves, a good vinyl turntable and phono preamp is a very musical thing. When digital was first introduced in the 1970's before the CD was invented, I initially loved the sound of it. I got to work with some amazing sounding early digital recordings like Donald Fagen's The Nightfly, Rush's Moving Pictures, The Police's Synchronicity. No hiss and 100% speed stability, for the first time, on classical piano. I loved it. The 3M digital and Soundstream digital machines sounded very good. Then when CD players came out I got bothered, like a lot of other people, with the brittleness and lack of echo detail and soundstage that characterized "bad" digital sound. It certainly wasn't "Perfect Sound Forever" as was advertised! As our ears got better and gear got better I pushed for engineers to stop using 16 bits DATs and move up to 88.2kHz or even 192kHz/24 bit recordings. The final result is definitely better. Now I love the new high resolution digital formats. Finally, the high resolution digital is always better than analog from a technical specification and, while not always, it can even sound better to our ears. I'm still a great believer in the use of tube gear and analog!
post #36 of 65
I haven't listened to anything he has ever been a part of, so his practices mean very little to me.

With you believing as you do, I'm bound to upset. I'll just go listen to my obsolete mechanisms...

NGF
post #37 of 65
Tim,
I should mention i heard most of those CDPs you are talking about and they are not quite in the league of cdps that can keep up. You could get a genki which is WAY better than a Mimik which is seriously missing some new technology. Just keep your ears open and listen. I got a chance to hear both Linn's, and i would not want the mimik in mysystem, when the Genki could be had for $600.
post #38 of 65
Is it really that bad? What if i could get one for around 350$?
post #39 of 65
No, its not BAD, you should listen yourself.
post #40 of 65
The Mimik was recommended to me on AudioAsylum's IRC chatroom by someone as a potential alternative to the Meridian 506.20. I ended up going with the 508 but this guy has had some extensive experience with used sources in that price range (can't remember who it was -- might even have been kuma???). Anyway, you should certainly give it a listen if you can. I've also heard that the Genki is a tad on the lean side.

I haven't heard either player, though. But I do know that if you can get a Meridian 506 or 508 you'll be happy. My 508 has a very natural and sweet sound -- overall, balanced though nothing flashy like some of the other players out there.
post #41 of 65
Quote:
Originally posted by arnaud
I am glad many jumped back on the generalization!

I did not look for the threads, but many have argued that the new upsampling technology is often commercial BS and brings no better stuff than 10 year old oversampling technology. Sorry for the 963SA hype, but over in Europe, many who have compared it to $100 philips CDP say it's no better for redbook...


Arnaud.
Exactly. What's the hype with this Philips machine. Managed to find one to audition briefly in redbook mode. Absolutely nothing special. I'd say 95% of dedicated redbook players at that price will sound much better.
About new and old, yes the technology is moving It all depends on what you'd call old. 5 years old high end player will most probably still put the new cheap one to shame. 10 years old...hmmm I don't know.
post #42 of 65
blr, Let me start off by saying I don't like the redbook playback of the 963SA. However I do think it is on par with most redbook players in the 3-4 hundred dollar range. I think thats what the Hype is, that you get a player comparible with other equally priced redbook players plus SACD and IMO one of the best, if not the best DVD playback made. Your right that someone wanting redbook only can do better. But someone wanting all 3 for very little money will be hard pressed to find one better.
post #43 of 65
To me at least it didn't sound as a 300-400 USD CD only player at all. More like 150-200 one. The added flexibility of multiformat is a bonus though and yes it's really good DVD-V player for sure.
To me it will be the ideal choice as a DVD player with only casual use as a CDP, but people here are using it their headphone rigs.
post #44 of 65
I don't disagree with your point about using the 963 as a cdp only. I just can see why alot of people would consider it a bargain for 360.00. As far as cdp's in the 3-4 hundred dollar range.(I no I'm going catch hell for this) Some sound almost O.K. and IMO none sound very good. I'm talking new prices here, not deals on used stuff.
post #45 of 65
I have had the Genki in my system for a bit I did like it. It is definetely not what I am looking for. It is detailed to almost a bland effect. It was a great player, and if i had a SS linn system, That is what i would get. the HDCD sounds awesome as well. It just didn't work in my system. I need natural, sweet, and mellow reproduction w/ super attack. I pretty much listen to rock and bluegrass, so things like Telefunken tubes, and too smooth analytical players are an earsore. I have yet to checkout the Meridian, but that is what I pretty much have decided on. They even match my Tube mono's perfectly (like that matters).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Classic CD players???